Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Mary E. Wilson vs. Thomas E. Murawski
Date: 01-25-2022
Case Number: ED109202
Judge: Philip M. Hess
Court:
MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS EASTERN DISTRICT
On appeal from The Circuit Court of St. Louis County
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Allison S. Lee and Alan E. Fred
Defendant's Attorney:
St. Louis, MO - Divorce Lawyer Directory
St. Louis, MO - Divorce Lawyer Directory
Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World.
Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement
Counselor:
MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public.
MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge
Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800
Description:
St. Louis, MO - Divorce lawyer represented Appellant with appeals the trial court's judgment dissolving his marriage with Mary Wilson.
Thomas Murawski ("Husband†or "Fatherâ€) appeals the trial court's judgment dissolving his
marriage with Mary Wilson ("Wife†or "Motherâ€). In Point I, Husband argues the judgment's
division of assets and debts failed to account for the parties' need to amend their 2017 tax return.
In Point II, Husband argues the trial court's monthly maintenance award to Wife was excessive.
In Point III, Husband argues the trial court incorrectly calculated Wife's net income. In Point
IV, Husband argues the trial court incorrectly calculated his income. In Point V, Husband argues
the trial court erred in its division of child custody. In Point VI, Husband argues the trial court's
child support award was improper. In Point VII, Husband argues the trial court's child support
award includes college education expenses he cannot afford. In Point VIII, Husband argues the
trial court incorrectly found he owes $5,600 in retroactive child support. In Point IX, Husband
argues he is entitled to a credit for overpayment of child support. In Point X, Husband argues the
trial court incorrectly found two bank accounts were not marital property. In Point XI, Husband
argues Wife squandered and improperly dissipated support payments. In Point XII, Husband
argues the trial court's division of assets improperly favored Wife. In Point XIII, Husband
argues the trial court incorrectly calculated the value of his retirement accounts. In Point XIV,
Husband argues the trial court incorrectly calculated the value of the parties' 2007 GMC Yukon.
In Point XV, Husband argues the trial court erred by assigning him a portion of Wife's credit
card debt. In Point XVI, Husband argues the trial court's asset equalization judgment must be
recalculated given the errors alleged on appeal.
Outcome:
AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of Mary E. Wilson vs. Thomas E. Murawski?
The outcome was: AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.
Which court heard Mary E. Wilson vs. Thomas E. Murawski?
This case was heard in <center><h5><b> MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS EASTERN DISTRICT </b>
<br></h5>
<font color="green"><i><h4>On appeal from The Circuit Court of St. Louis County </i></font></center></h4>, MO. The presiding judge was Philip M. Hess.
Who were the attorneys in Mary E. Wilson vs. Thomas E. Murawski?
Plaintiff's attorney: Allison S. Lee and Alan E. Fred. Defendant's attorney: St. Louis, MO - Divorce Lawyer Directory
Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World.
Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement
Counselor:
MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public.
MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge
Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800.
When was Mary E. Wilson vs. Thomas E. Murawski decided?
This case was decided on January 25, 2022.
St. Louis, MO - Divorce lawyer represented Appellant with appeals the trial court's judgment dissolving his marriage with Mary Wilson.
Thomas Murawski ("Husband†or "Fatherâ€) appeals the trial court's judgment dissolving his
marriage with Mary Wilson ("Wife†or "Motherâ€). In Point I, Husband argues the judgment's
division of assets and debts failed to account for the parties' need to amend their 2017 tax return.
In Point II, Husband argues the trial court's monthly maintenance award to Wife was excessive.
In Point III, Husband argues the trial court incorrectly calculated Wife's net income. In Point
IV, Husband argues the trial court incorrectly calculated his income. In Point V, Husband argues
the trial court erred in its division of child custody. In Point VI, Husband argues the trial court's
child support award was improper. In Point VII, Husband argues the trial court's child support
award includes college education expenses he cannot afford. In Point VIII, Husband argues the
trial court incorrectly found he owes $5,600 in retroactive child support. In Point IX, Husband
argues he is entitled to a credit for overpayment of child support. In Point X, Husband argues the
trial court incorrectly found two bank accounts were not marital property. In Point XI, Husband
argues Wife squandered and improperly dissipated support payments. In Point XII, Husband
argues the trial court's division of assets improperly favored Wife. In Point XIII, Husband
argues the trial court incorrectly calculated the value of his retirement accounts. In Point XIV,
Husband argues the trial court incorrectly calculated the value of the parties' 2007 GMC Yukon.
In Point XV, Husband argues the trial court erred by assigning him a portion of Wife's credit
card debt. In Point XVI, Husband argues the trial court's asset equalization judgment must be
recalculated given the errors alleged on appeal.
About This Case
What was the outcome of Mary E. Wilson vs. Thomas E. Murawski?
The outcome was: AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.
Which court heard Mary E. Wilson vs. Thomas E. Murawski?
This case was heard in <center><h5><b> MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS EASTERN DISTRICT </b> <br></h5> <font color="green"><i><h4>On appeal from The Circuit Court of St. Louis County </i></font></center></h4>, MO. The presiding judge was Philip M. Hess.
Who were the attorneys in Mary E. Wilson vs. Thomas E. Murawski?
Plaintiff's attorney: Allison S. Lee and Alan E. Fred. Defendant's attorney: St. Louis, MO - Divorce Lawyer Directory Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World. Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement Counselor: MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public. MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800.
When was Mary E. Wilson vs. Thomas E. Murawski decided?
This case was decided on January 25, 2022.